That article seems over the top. Not to mention that RIAD 6 isn't new, Compaq had that as an option way before HP bought them. As to having to wait 2 weeks, well, that's why we buy the more expensive options with hardware due to the warrentee program.
On Sat, Oct 8, 2011 at 2:14 AM, Mike Hoffman <[email protected]> wrote: > Great articles. > I have been sceptical of Raid5 for main years after an incident where I > spent 2 weeks waiting on a spare controller being sourced while an array was > down and 400+ people were asking me when it would be fixed about twice a > day!! > In the SBS case it was a Raid1 Pair. I now would much rather put in 4 > mirrored pairs than a RAID5. Putting in faster drives or SSD is a much > simpler option. Anyone can install a RAID5 set, but it takes a lot of work > to recover data from one. > It's like anything in IT, if you put all your eggs in one basket then you > need to protect that basket. If your budget cannot afford to protect that > basket then you need to mitigate or accept the risk. > Mike > > -----Original Message----- > From: Angus Scott-Fleming [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: 08 October 2011 05:14 > To: NT System Admin Issues > Subject: Re: Server gets sloooower the longer it stays up > > On 5 Oct 2011 at 11:44, Mike Hoffman wrote: > > > I´ve just had a similar thing with an SBS 2008 box, and discovered > the > > Raid drives had issues. After replacing one drive the rebuild stuck > at > > 99.83% and after that every 6-8 hours the network cards stopped and > the > > system just froze. Now the box is virtual and running fine since. > > Related story .... > > Why RAID 5 stops working in 2009 | ZDNet > http://www.zdnet.com/blog/storage/why-raid-5-stops-working-in-2009/162 > > Due to the size of modern drives, one can apparently EXPECT a read-failure > during a RAID-5 rebuild, so RAID 5 is no longer reliable enough. With 120GB > drives it was fine. With terabyte drives it isn't. > > RAID5 versus RAID10 (or even RAID3 or RAID4) > "To put things into perspective: If a drive costs $1000US (and most are > far less expensive than that) then switching from a 4 pair RAID10 array > to > a 5 drive RAID5 array will save 3 drives or $3000US. What is the cost of > overtime, wear and tear on the technicians, DBAs, managers, and > customers > of even a recovery scare? What is the cost of reduced performance and > possibly reduced customer satisfaction? Finally what is the cost of lost > business if data is unrecoverable? I maintain that the drives are FAR > cheaper! Hence my mantra: NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5! NO > RAID5! NO RAID5! NO RAID5!" > http://miracleas.com/BAARF/RAID5_versus_RAID10.txt > > > -- > Angus Scott-Fleming > GeoApps, Tucson, Arizona > 1-520-290-5038 > Security Blog: http://geoapps.com/ > > > > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ < > http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > --- > To manage subscriptions click here: > http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ > or send an email to [email protected] > with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin > > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ > ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ > > --- > To manage subscriptions click here: > http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ > or send an email to [email protected] > with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin > > ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~ --- To manage subscriptions click here: http://lyris.sunbelt-software.com/read/my_forums/ or send an email to [email protected] with the body: unsubscribe ntsysadmin
